Re: Audi as a Consumer Vehicle

[nscbarry@mail.msy.bellsouth.net]

In addition to the Audi being just a more exciting car to drive, one must
realize that with the quattro system that the actual forces used to move the
car are divided over 4 wheels, axle's, etc. This translates into less overall
stress on the drive train, and any individual component, then over a 2wd
system, fwd or rwd, therefore allowing the system to be more reliable despite
having more moving parts.
As for the ecno boxes, Honda, toyota, isuzu, and the rest. Last time my A6q
was in for routine service, the dealer gave me an Accord as a loaner. Not a
complete pos, but possessing nothing of what we all love about our Audis.
When i returned the to retrive the A6, i thanked them for confirming what i
already felt, that i will NEVER own an Accord or any other such car. I would
sooned drive a 15yo Audi w/250K on it first.
As for reliability my brother has a 94 Acura integra, which blew the tranny
when it was 9mos old, and the thing has never been right since. My sister's
91 Accord is in the shop at least 3~4 times a year. Also as for the 5 cars
the SO an i have owned since 86, 2 BMW's, 2 Fords, 1 Audi, the bmw's and the
audi have been the most reliable, low matinance of the bunch. Besides, much
of how reliable a car is depends on how well it is taken care of.

sean 96 A6q

Pete Kraus wrote:

> Huw Powell, in his response to OPINION WANTED : Audi as a
> "consumer" vehicle, comments:
>
> >one of the reasons I haven't made the Q leap -the budget factor...
> >someday!
>
> >Actually, he's wrong here for another reason.  Look at the subject
> >line.  I don't think Audi has yet made a car which meets the needs first
> >outlined...
>
> >The original questioner should buy a adnoH.
>
> I had a feeling this thread might turn controversial.  When I bought my
> '85 4KSQ in 1987, I had reservations similar to Huw's.  Actually, I had
> been looking for a used Coupe GT, a car I much admired (still do).
>
> In the 11 years and 130K+ miles I've owned the 4KSQ, I can't think of a
> single repair or maintenance expense attributable to AWD.  I'd have to
> check the service records to be sure, but my impression is that
> AWD-related components are commendably reliable.
>
> Having said that, I reluctantly must agree with Huw, for the reason he
> states, that if the original poster means what he says about purchasing
> a consumer vehicle, Honda makes more economic sense.  However,
> said poster claims to be an Audi enthusiast.  I submit that no
> self-respecting Audi enthusiast will be satisfied with a Honda as his/her
> only car.
>
> It becomes a matter of priorities:  Indulge one's enthusiasm, keep the
> fingers crossed and be prepared to pay a little more through the years.
> Or take the safer, duller, possibly cheaper (there are no guarantees the
> Honda will be fault-free, although my parents drive two high-mileage
> Accords that are) alternative, and tough it out until circumstances
> change.
>
> Pete
> Pete_Kraus@emory.org